Ramón Cavieres is director of Activa, one of the main consulting firms that takes the pulse of citizens. Today he is focused on the final stretch before the plebiscite for a new Constitution on December 17, which will settle Chile’s second attempt in three years to replace the Magna Carta born in 1980 during the dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet (1973-1990) and reformed some 60 times since 1989. After the rejection in September 2022 of the proposal dominated by the left, another process began, which ends with the referendum in which Chileans will have to vote For or Against the text drafted by the Constitutional Council, which This time the right led.
Cavieres, who lives in England, is passing through Chile precisely because of the political context. He describes the campaign in the electoral strip as “confusing” and suggests that in a climate of constitutional fatigue and fatigue, the referendum options have become the citizens’ versus the political elites.
Ask. In what position are Chileans less than three weeks before the plebiscite?
Answer. It is always good to point out that this is a process with low interest, with a low level of trust, in a context where citizens grew tired of the constituent process. People have other emergencies, such as economic issues and crime. That said, from the last measurement we provided, I would say that people have already started to make their decision. We had 30% undecided two weeks ago and today we are at 20%. The Against option is at 47% and the For option is at 22%. According to our latest forecast, we are at a ratio of 66% for Against and 34% for For. It is an important difference. Unless something very strange happens, a radical change, the probability that the Against will win is high.
Q. Where are the undecided people going?
A. We have studied that 22% of undecided people and, when you try to get them to choose an option, 60% still remain undecided. And of the remaining 40%, a very similar percentage goes to For and Against. Therefore, there is no clear trend to say that they go more towards one option or another. That is why we think that the undecided, when they make their decision, will not change the distribution that exists today, they will not change the balance.
Q. How would you rate the campaign in the electoral zone?
A. Confusing. It no longer has anything to do with the constituent process, but has become a political story. And almost a face-to-face election, almost partisan, not constitutional. They mix issues associated with the Government, criticism of the Government, some elements of aggressiveness… All of this confuses citizens. There are people who think that voting against is voting against the Government, according to studies I have seen.
Q. At one point the analysis was that the right assumed that the vote was a plebiscite for the Boric Government, but apparently the citizens do not see it that way
A. No, according to the preference indicators. People are not only against the text but against all politicians. Don’t think that because Boric has a low evaluation, 30%, it means that there are political sectors that have high approval. No. People are very critical of political parties, of the entire political elite. This plebiscite was somehow transformed into citizenship against the elite. In the end we are in that scenario. If one is going to do a reading, we are talking about In favor of a political elite that designed this process, and Against would be representing the citizens who became bored with the process and criticism of the elite.
Q. At the beginning of October, Republican leader José Antonio Kast said that they could turn the result of the plebiscite in favor. What would have to happen for that to happen?
R. In some way the strategy was that the right-wing leaders did not appear so much [campaña electoral] because they know that citizens are critical of the political scene. If eventually the center-right figures had more prominence in the campaign [podría favorecer al apruebo], although it is clear that they are not convinced and that is transmitted. Evelyn Matthei, one of the leaders, was against it at first. Obviously, she then had to line up. And Kast has also tried not to have so much prominence. What would have to happen? We would have to almost delve into science fiction, something very strange… that the political or security crisis would eventually become very complex, which could be a trigger for people to change their position a little, since one of the stories of The supporters of the In favor is that the proposal can better handle the issue of security.
![Ramón Cavieres in interview with EL PAÍS.](https://imagenes.elpais.com/resizer/yWfK7jaUmaxHBY17hUFJDjEKa7o=/414x0/cloudfront-eu-central-1.images.arcpublishing.com/prisa/PFJQAAGWNNATJB56A57AJBUDKE.jpg)
Q. If the Contra party wins, would the blow to the Republicans be comparable to that which the Boric Government received in the first constitutional attempt?
A. In some ways, yes. These are the blows that the political sectors are having. An ideological text from the extreme right and extreme left would be rejected. And it is a message that is becoming clear. Now, I am not so clear that if the texts had been less extreme, a little more transversal, any consensus would have been reached. Because? Because citizens have a very great criticism of the political spectrum as such.
Q. How do you evaluate the strategy of the Boric Government in this second process?
A. The Government was already badly damaged in the first plebiscite. It was a major defeat. Here in no case is the Government going to gain anything. The best-case scenario is not to fall for a Constitution, according to your perception, that is more right-wing partisan. But he learned that it is better to keep the margin and I think it has been a good strategy. But that position, which is the most reasonable, is also complex. Stand with the Against —obviously the opposition has tried to link it— is to defend the Constitution of origin of the dictator Pinochet.
Q. How much does that crossroads on the left affect you?
A. The left is in a very uncomfortable position, obviously. He has to choose, in theory, between a Constitution of Kast and one of Guzmán or Pinochet. It is a very unpleasant choice for them, but they take the position of the least harm, which is to reject this text. And somehow he retreats and suggests that there will be no third process. That we have to wait a while, about 10 years, for that space to open up in the political context and allow a new process or depth of important reforms to the current Constitution. On the other hand, if A Favor wins, it is an issue that will be closed for at least 20 or 30 years.
Q. If Contra wins, where will Chile stand on December 18, the day after the plebiscite?
A. It’s a good question. I think it will be calmer, regardless of what happens. That the people are going to get rid of the tension of this constituent process and that the Government is going to be more focused on trying to promote the reforms or negotiate what they can with all the difficulty that it is going to be due to not having the majority in Congress. I think the atmosphere is going to decompress, but let’s see… everything will depend on the leadership that both the Government and the opposition take.
#Ramón #Cavieres #Chiles #constitutional #plebiscite #transformed #citizens #elite